Opinion - Interviews   

"We can't just arrest anyone who prays five times and has a beard"

Nirupama Subramanian

Khurshid Kasuri, Pakistan's Foreign Minister, believes the postponement of the India-Pakistan Foreign Secretaries talks will strengthen those who do not want the peace process to succeed. In an interview on Monday, he said both countries must press ahead with the dialogue in their own interests and that of the region. Excerpts:

— File Photo: Rajeev Bhatt

Khurshid Kasuri: "We shouldn't play into the hands of people in both countries who are not happy with the peace process."

Mr. Kasuri, you upset India with your comments immediately after the blasts.

I had started by condemning [the Mumbai blasts] unequivocally. Ghastly, horrendous acts of terrorism, I called it. So the question is, was it reported or wasn't it.

If they did, why did the Indian spokesperson a) not refer to what I'd said; b) took it completely out of context. When the Foreign Minister of Pakistan goes [to the United States], they are bound to ask him about the India-Pakistan dialogue. So the condemnation came at the beginning, and two or three hours later, during the course of various interviews, they would ask me about the Pakistan-India process. To put the two things together without the reference to the unequivocal condemnation means that they just wanted an excuse to link Mumbai somehow to Pakistan, infrastructure of terrorism, and Kashmir. So a statement delivered out of context was latched on to for this purpose. Why was it done? It is known that the President, Prime Minister, and I have been very supportive of the peace process.

It's very counter-productive while investigations are going on to point towards Pakistan. When you do something of this nature, you actually influence objective police analysis and police investigation.

If there's a lead Pakistan can help, but it has to be a definitive lead, not speculation of this kind within 30 seconds of the incident. All countries in South Asia have gone through the process of nation-building and they've gone through immense problems that find reactions in some acts of violence. You have violence in India, in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal. Therefore, it could well be an Indian phenomenon, purely indigenous. It is unfair to link everything to Pakistan.

But how can you address the concern in India that Pakistan is not doing enough to eliminate terrorist outfits from its soil?

I've just been to the United States and France, and I've been paid so many compliments on the war against terrorism. If Pakistan were actively actually doing the sort of thing alleged by India, you think the U.S., European Union, and other leading countries of the world are so stupid that they would publicly pay us compliments knowing that we are maintaining training camps albeit not for Afghanistan but for Kashmir? Because in the ultimate analysis everything gets linked up.

But don't you think the West separates the groups waging jihad in Kashmir from the ones that are more directly linked to Al-Qaeda?

No, the international community would not pay us those compliments if we were maintaining such camps in Kashmir or turning a blind eye to it.

And secondly India's own leaders, civil and military — I have a list of 20 statements — who have admitted and said on different occasions that what they describe as cross-border movement has come down remarkably, appreciably or to some extent.

You have erected this fence [on the LoC]. There was a time we did not allow you to make the fence, there was a time the moment you make, we destroy it. Why have we allowed you to do it? Precisely for this reason — that we don't wish to take the blame every time an incident happens.

What is one to make of the fact that the Jamaat-ud-Daawa, which is really the renamed Lashkar-e-Taiba, operates freely in Pakistan? And the Jaish-e-Mohammad, which has also reappeared under new names?

We have banned some organisations. Arrested quite a few people. You are not the only ones pointing this out. Others have also asked why for example during the earthquake were certain people allowed to help during the relief operations.

The Indian allegation is the same people who were in the LeT are in the JuD. What is the option — to kill them? Government of Pakistan is watching them like hawks. During the earthquake our answer was the JuD is doing charitable work. The JuD people even helped NATO troops, they helped them navigate the difficult areas, rivers and streams in Kashmir. They also know they are being watched. So what else is expected is what I want to know. The LeT has been banned.

People who have been involved [in terrorist activities] will not be allowed — this is the government of Pakistan's word and President Musharraf's word — to run our foreign policy for us. We have very strong interest in the peace process with India.

Even in U.S. and India where you have rule of law, and somebody is not committing a crime, do you simply prosecute on the basis that they are praying five times a day or they have a beard? I mean there has to be some crime committed by them.

But the Americans have designated the JuD as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist...

The U.S. these days is so extra-sensitive about so many things. We do not agree with their assessments. We will make our own assessments. And if we find anybody involved in acts of terror or planning anything, immediate and strict action will be taken. What I'm saying is that it does not help to simply start finger-pointing. Pakistan has had many acts of terrorism, the last was a horrendous one in which 45 people died in Karachi, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not blamed anyone.

The Karachi blast has been blamed by many people in Pakistan on sectarian strife...

It is blamed on many things ... I won't go further. What I am saying is we don't rush to judgments about incidents in Karachi or elsewhere.

How do you see the postponement of the Foreign Secretary talks?

It's a very negative development. After all the peace process is not a favour to Pakistan. It is in the interests of both India and Pakistan. It is in the interests of South Asia. And the two biggest countries in the region are India and Pakistan. In the past, SAARC had remained a hostage to Pakistan-India tension. It seemed like SAARC was about to take off. And if we are to go back to square one, it is not good news. The only people who are happy are the ones who [want to destroy the peace process].

Do you think this is square one?

I hope not. I hope we don't go back to square one because a lot of work has been done, a lot of good work. But we shouldn't play into the hands of people in both countries who are not happy with the peace process. Believe me, these are strong forces.

What is the sense you are getting from India on the postponement — is this a temporary halt or a freeze?

I don't know. They just said new dates will be given, so I'd like to take it at face value.

What do you have to say about Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's statement that Pakistan has to show more commitment to the January 2004 joint declaration for the peace process to move forward?

This assurance [in January 2004] has come from the highest levels, from the President of Pakistan, and there is absolutely no reason to doubt that commitment. By this negative development that we have had, only those opposed to the peace process in the first instance are going to be happy.

What can be done to get the process moving again?

There should be more stakeholders in the peace process. The media has to play a stronger role, particularly in India. There are very strong mindsets that exist, and media has to be at the forefront of breaking those mindsets.

We need the strong peace constituency that has grown in Pakistan and in India and that's why I have been saying in the last few months that while there's been great progress in different areas like sports and trade, and culture and people-to-people contacts, we've not resolved even the minor issues like Sir Creek and Siachen. My fear is unless this happens, scepticism would grow with the peace process and this would be very dangerous. It would negatively impact on the morale of the very people in both the countries whose support is essential for the continuation of the peace process.

Are there any initiatives Pakistan will take to break the deadlock?

What can we do? We've already offered, the President, the Prime Minister, and I have offered that if India were to give us concrete leads, we would follow that up.

If you had to send a single message to India, what would it be?

I would like to say that there will be difficulties ahead. But we should not provide space to people who are against the peace process; if we do they will expand that space for themselves to the detriment of the people of South Asia.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Massacre of the innocent
A small hike makes big news
The onus is on the secularist
Climate-change deniers have now gone nuclear
Corrections and clarifications
A controversial survey on India
Terror in Chhattisgarh
Pakistan on notice
On POTA
Doctors and strike
West Asia crisis
"We can't just arrest anyone who prays five times and has a beard"

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu